EVENTS

They really are all about controlling your life, aren’t they?

North Carolina Republicans have just introduced another of their morality bills.

(a) Marriages may be dissolved and the parties thereto divorced from the bonds of matrimony on the application of either party, if and when the party upon satisfying the following requirements before filing for divorce under this section:

(1)The husband and wife have lived separate and apart for one year,and themet a two‑year waiting period. The spouse seeking the divorce shall give a written notice of intent to file for divorce to the other spouse at the beginning of the two‑year waiting period. The notice of intent shall be properly acknowledged in accordance with Chapter 10B of the General Statutes. During the two‑year waiting period, there is no requirement that the husband and wife live separate and apart.

(2)During the two‑year waiting period, the husband and wife have each completed courses on (i) improving communication skills and (ii) conflict resolution. Courses required by this subdivision do not have to be completed together as a couple.

(3)If a couple has a child, the husband and wife have each completed a course of at least four hours on the impact of divorce on children.

(b)Upon satisfying the requirements under subsection (a) of this section, a husband and wife may proceed with an action for divorce by submitting to the court evidence that (i) the requirements of subsection (a) of this section have been satisfied and (ii) the plaintiff or defendant in the suit for divorce has resided in the State for a period of six months.months prior to filing for divorce. A divorce under this section shall not be barred to either party by any defense or plea based upon any provision of G.S. 50‑7, a plea of res judicata, or a plea of recrimination. Notwithstanding the provisions of G.S. 50‑11, or of the common law, a divorce under this section shall not affect the rights of a dependent spouse with respect to alimony which have been asserted in the action or any other pending action.

Whether there has been a resumption of marital relations during the period of separation shall be determined pursuant to G.S. 52‑10.2. Isolated incidents of sexual intercourse between the parties shall not toll the statutory period required for divorce predicated on separation of one year."

You don’t have to take classes to get married or have children, and they aren’t imposing a two year waiting period on marriages. I think they’re missing a trick here.

Comments

Well, they couldn’t do that. Then all those nice girls and boys who simply made a little mistake and gave in to temptation once in the heat of the moment* wouldn’t be able to get all legitimized in time for the birth certificate.

*trufact: among many evangelicals, it’s considered a lesser sin to have sex if you really meant not to and it just happened. That’s why birth control is so bad: it proves you were planning it ahead of time, and that means you were sinning on purpose, which is worse than giving into temptation with the best of intentions.**

**this is also partly why the teen birth rate is so high in red states

Wow! Just like the 50s all over again. I suppose who this really hurts the most is women in abusive relationships. Now they’ll be saddled with the guy for at least 2 years and have to take some dumb classes rather get on with life.

Speaking of the ongoing stupid coming out of Republicans, I was just reading here about Alaska Rep. Don Young calling immigrants “wetbacks” during a radio interview. To excuse himself, he said “I used a term that was commonly used during my days growing up on a farm in Central California. I know that this term is not used in the same way nowadays and I meant no disrespect.” So he actually thinks that calling someone a wetback when he was a kid back in the 50s wasn’t disrespect. Geez, either he’s an idiot or he thinks we’re all idiots. Or both.

(2) During the two‑year waiting period, the husband and wife have each completed courses on (i) improving communication skills and (ii) conflict resolution. Courses required by this subdivision do not have to be completed together as a couple.

What in the…

Well, I’m sure this will fix any and all thoughts of future divorces, oh my yes! Certainly, it will prove wonderful for all those people in abusive relationships and need to get out, stat. Yep.

Born-again Christians’ rate was 27 percent. To make matters even more distressing for believers, atheists/agnostics had the lowest rate of divorce 21 percent.

U.S. divorce rates: for various faith groups, age groups and …
www. religioustolerance. org/chr_dira.htm

Apr 27, 2000 – Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for … The apparently higher rate among born-again Christians, and lower rate among … Barna uses the term “non-denominational” to refer to Evangelical Christian …. However, a review of the report is at: http://www.adherents.com/ …

I’m from NC and yes the republicans all the branches of govt here. No opposition at all. The worst part is something hidden. While separated, if you date someone then your spouse can sue your boyfriend/girlfriend for loss of spousal privilege or whatever. I personally know people that have had this happen & it’s destroyed people when it’s just been one year as a waiting period. Fantasia, from American idol, got caught up in a mess like that recently here in NC.

The settlements can be in the hundreds of thousands & it has destroyed families that were created during the waiting period.

In a lot of places here in NC it is like the ’50’s still. This is about them knowing what’s best for everyone else. I’m braced for when they come after women’s right directly because there is nothing stopping them at all from enacting all the horrible laws they can get through. This is just the tip of the iceberg for what they have planned here.

To excuse himself, he said “I used a term that was commonly used during my days growing up on a farm in Central California. I know that this term is not used in the same way nowadays and I meant no disrespect.” So he actually thinks that calling someone a wetback when he was a kid back in the 50s wasn’t disrespect. Geez, either he’s an idiot or he thinks we’re all idiots. Or both.

I want to go in a meta-direction and draw a parallel.

I think we see the flawed logic at times at work in the atheist community with slurs, and maybe even with sarcasm.

[some paraphrases I made up]

— “It’s common, so I think of it as normal, so it can’t be offensive to you.”
— “It happens so much you can’t possibly eliminate it.”

[Both of the above could be subtext to why some people think dongle jokes shouldn’t be reported.]

Although I am coming to hate the word “charitable”, a more charitable framing is :

— “Other people get away with it; how was I supposed to know it wouldn’t fly?”
And
— “It’s really not fair that I get reprimanded if this rule is only selectively enforced.” [para]

And they will point to Yahweh for justification? The same Yahweh who thinks stoning non-virgins and taking sex slaves from war captives is kosher but hasn’t been seen with “his Asherah” in thousands of years.

…I just had a nasty thought: Asherah was a victim of spousal abuse, and now she’s gone, WE’RE Yahweh’s temper tantrum targets. Amazing how much organized religion resembles spousal and parental abuse; the Bride of Christ is a battered wife.

If you refuse to go to the mandatory classes then they divorce can’t be finalized.

I assumed that was a feature, not a bug. Isn’t the goal of the bill to effectively make divorce as difficult as possible? I suspect that the people that wrote it would have preferred to just levy an outright ban, but knew it wouldn’t fly.

Hold on a second. Divorce waiting periods actually exist? This is the first I’ve ever heard of such a concept.

Smaller government! Less Regulation! Unless it is dealing with your day to day life and not the running of the company or making money. Then we need to micromanage the fuck out of you.

Somebody more intelligent than me (somebody named Sally) pointed out that the reason that Rethugs want a small government is that a small government can do all the things you outlined, but be too small and powerless to manage large corporate entities with lots of money. Everything in their platform makes sense when viewed through this lens.

This is a cunning plan by the muslims that have infiltrated the North Carolina Republicans. Eventually, all the men in North Carolina will embrace Islam so that they have only to say “I divorce you” three times and Bob’s your uncle.

Somebody more intelligent than me (somebody named Sally) pointed out that the reason that Rethugs want a small government is that a small government can do all the things you outlined, but be too small and powerless to manage large corporate entities with lots of money. Everything in their platform makes sense when viewed through this lens.

Yes, this fits. They are a bunch of plutocratic totalitarians, filled with politicians who aspire to be middle-management.

my my, the theocracy that some Christians want. It’s always nice to see them even trying to legislate against their fellow christians. Incidentally, I have always wondered why DOMA and other anti homosexual laws weren’t contested on the grounds that other religions have no problems with marrying homosexuals, supporting the availablity of abortions. If one religion gets in charge, other religions and versions of that first religion suffer. Alas, I suspect that our supposedly liberal theists perhaps aren’t that liberal at all and know if they attack religions like theirs, they know the same arguments can be used against them.

Twits like these Republicans are all for the hugest government possible that is entirely focused on controlling people.

@Caine #7 — Yes, I know only too well. I did a quick googley and it looks like over 90% of the victims of abuse are women, so such laws probably have a bigger impact on women than men. As I recall from the Dark Ages, these sorts of laws…which were common in those day*…were understood to hinder women from getting divorces.

* My first wife and I divorced in the mid-70s in California. She needed it for financial reasons, but we couldn’t just get a divorce. Oh, no, we had to jump through institutionalized religious morality first. While it only took a couple of days to get married, we had to wait a year or two for the final divorce decree. As part of the hassle, we had to have different addresses…we were still roommates when we started the process (and we are still friends). There was no end to the silliness.

Yeah, I know. Mister divorced his ex in SoCal back in the ’70s. Getting all the paperwork done was its own little nightmare, then there was coordinating court appearances between one person in SoCal, the other in NoCal, filing more fucking paperwork, getting paperwork signed and sent back, going back to court, lather, rinse, repeat. At that time, there was a year waiting period before final decree, but after several court hearings, the judge knocked it down to 6 months, as they had been separated for so long. And this was a no fault divorce.

@ raven #9: It may not have had a chance before NC went purple in the 2010 presidential election, but in that same election the GoP got control of the House and decided that NC turning purple should never happen again, so they gerrymandered all the blue districts into red ones. Blue votes simply don’t count in NC any more.

I’m still not seeing why they can’t just take a bus or plane to Las Vegas but whatever

I don’t know if it’s still easy to obtain a quickie divorce in Las Vegas, but back in the day, you had to establish residency for a minimum of six weeks. Think about a person in an abusive marriage, trying to get out – they may not have the money to travel to Las Vegas, let alone set up a residence and and pay for the necessary paperwork (even in a quickie divorce, it’s best to have an attorney). What if the person has a job and can’t just up and disappear for that length of time? What if they have children? It’s simply not the easy solution you seem to think it is.

Caine — My sympathies for Mister and so much for “no fault” part, wouldn’t you say. And this is California in the 70s! The governor, Jerry Brown, visiting the Zen Center. Hippies sleeping on Haight Street. Movie stars. Limousines. And yet, marriage laws enacted by the Beverley Hillbillies. Go figger.

Raven — Caine already hit some of the critical factors of quick divorces in Nevada. (Then there’s my personal distaste for both Las Vegas or Reno.)

You can get them online. The Nevada residence requirement can be gotten around for about a $1000. On service offers quick divorces online through Guam for $1500. Only $600 and no residency for a divorce through the Dominican Republic.

Of course, if you’re already dealing with an emotionally complicated situation in North Carolina, getting involved with some online divorce service…itself a sketchy prospect…might not be the direction you want to take.

Also note that all these quick divorces require both parties signing the papers. If one of the partners doesn’t go along you’re right back where you started from.

Of course, if you’re already dealing with an emotionally complicated situation in North Carolina, getting involved with some online divorce service…itself a sketchy prospect…might not be the direction you want to take.

I don’t see why.

Even under the current no fault, low hassle laws, divorce can be emotionally and financially traumatic for a lot of people. Especially if one partner asserts a (nonexistent) ownership right and tries to prevent it. I’ve seen people end up in jail for beating up their soon to be ex-wife, as though that is going to prevent them from getting a divorce.

This was why the divorce laws were made simple and no fault. Rather than have to prove that your former spouse and parent of your children was a demented, monstrous sleep around slut or philanderer, whether they were or not, they tried to make it a matter of simple consent or not.

I imagine the rethuglicans think that women (and men) in abusive relationships won’t file under a “no fault” statute. Thing is, most of the states give women jack shit in terms of protection from their abusive spouses. Lots of them even let folks with an order of protection against them keep their guns, cause his right to own a gun is more important than her right to live. My mom filed “no fault” and when I asked her why, she basically said she didn’t want to provoke him, and she was “just happy to get out alive.” If she had filed any other way, she would have had to get an order of protection, which she thought he would have interpreted as a threat (mind, he thought damn near everything was a threat). Of course, republicans, even more than others, seem to live in a bubble where all DV (or rape) is perpetrated by “criminals” or “criminal types” who can’t be reasoned with or influenced by laws or public health initiatives, so why bother trying?

I barely remember when the changed the divorce laws out here. IIRC, it was in the 1970’s.

But it is coming back to me.

They changed them because the old laws were doing more harm than good. They didn’t prevent people from getting divorced or separating, they just made it a lot more complicated, expensive, and traumatic.

North Carolina is going back to the good old days. The mythological ones that never existed.

Raven @44:
I will not take consolation from fundamentalist Christians screwing over their own people , because they’re still screwing over people. No matter who those people are , none of them deserve to have their lives screwed with.

No, the ones in power are screwing over their women, children, and poor who don’t have much say in what the churches teach them about deserving abuse and sanctifying ignorance. That doesn’t make fellow christians into property. It’s still blaming the victim when it’s “their” victim and not one of ‘ours’.

Divorce waiting periods actually exist? This is the first I’ve ever heard of such a concept.

those are also normal in other countries. German divorce law requires 1 year of separation (though oddly, this “separation” can still be done while livign in the same house; you’re just not supposed to spend time together)

My state just considered having a one year waiting period (and is one of the most liberal states in the nation) and I was like “What the fuck???” when I saw it in the paper. I guess I’m less surprised to see this happening in NC.

How about sterilising all kiddies at birth, and then allowing them to apply for fertility after they have proven worthy…..now why didn’t “yahweh” do it that way in the first place…? Nonexistence is just a convenient excuse for poor design.

How about sterilising all kiddies at birth, and then allowing them to apply for fertility after they have proven worthy…..now why didn’t “yahweh” do it that way in the first place…? Nonexistence is just a convenient excuse for poor design.

What, so they can define who’s worthy? Fuck that shit. I find your suggestion, whether or not you’re ‘joking’, repugnant.

(3) If a couple has a child, the husband and wife have each completed a course of at least four hours on the impact of divorce on children.

We know from previous ‘abortion counselling’ bills that any such course is going to be four hours of guilt trips intended to keep the marriage together, with no consideration for the fact that marriage can be ‘impactful’ as well, if that marriage is toxic.

As in every state, residents of Kentucky already enjoy religious liberty under the First Amendment, but conservatives in the state legislature decided to craft a proposal that would empower Kentuckians with “sincerely held” religious beliefs to disregard state laws and regulations…

From Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church:

What are some of the things that could happen if this bill becomes law? A pharmacist could refuse to provide Plan B drugs to a rape victim. The owner of an apartment building could refuse to rent to an unmarried couple. A woman who gets pregnant out of wedlock could be summarily fired from her job. The measure would also largely nullify protections for gays and lesbians that a handful of Kentucky communities have passed.

In short, the bill could end up elevating the religious beliefs of some people over the civil rights of all.

After the Governor vetoed the unconstitutional law, the Kentucky legislature overrode the veto. Now the pumped up, victorious religious-right activists have promised to take similar legislation to all of these blessed United States. They are calling the legislation a “Religious Liberty” bill.

The authorities say Monsignor Wallin, 61, had methamphetamine mailed to him from co-conspirators in California and made more than $300,000 in drug sales out of his Waterbury apartment in the second half of 2012. He also bought a small shop selling pornography and sex toys in the nearby town of North Haven, through which he laundered the proceeds, authorities said.

“a proposal that would empower Kentuckians with “sincerely held” religious beliefs to disregard state laws and regulations…”

Who defines ‘sincerely held religious beliefs’? This is a ‘get out of jail free” card for anything, including “getting an immediate divorce” (or, I suppose, “selling meth” or “assassinating the governor”).

Who defines ‘sincerely held religious beliefs’? This is a ‘get out of jail free” card for anything, including “getting an immediate divorce” (or, I suppose, “selling meth” or “assassinating the governor”).

I have decided not to assassinate anyone in Kentucky because I hold my religious beliefs insincerely. Not sure how they are going to test for insincerity before they jail people trying to take advantage of this new law. Waterboarding? Witch trials?

But it’s not what they *said*. “Sincerely held religious beliefs” can be held to cover anything from sharia to Sovereign Citizens to Spaghetti Monsters, and can justify anything from “I can evict people of whose sexuality I disapprove” to “paying taxes is a sin”.

I got a divorce. It was over a year after seperation, and half a year was the slow courts and signing off on custody, but I’d sooner rot in hell than have anyone try to tell me when I can get bldy divorced. Do they *want* to try and further humiliate pissed off and disillusioned ex-spouses filling up counselling rooms for some mandatory bit of government theatre?

I’m just saying that if you *do* assassinate a Kentucky legislator, there’s no way to assess how sincere you are, and no way to define what is or is not a “religion”..

Hmm, but is that really true anymore?
Aren’t we beginning to get pretty good at working out what patterns of brain activity correspond to what emotional states, at least in a broad sense?

In other words, (not that anyone would accept it), couldn’t we run a brain scan series to determine if a person’s proclamation of belief was associated with patterns typical of devotion, love, loyalty and forthrightness… or associated with the lies people tell when they are in trouble?